So you're telling me that if you were on twitter, I could have read your multiple, elongated posts in just one, short, 140 character tweet?
What's the point? All i would do is what every other tweeter does and tweet a short url that would bring you to my post. So I waste my time tweeting, you waste your time reading and clicking on to land here when all the time you would end up here reading the post anyway, just as you have done. See what i mean?
To be fair - just because you feel that the most important thing that happens to you is what time you took a shit and you feel twitter is the best platform for you to publicise that, then you've been watching/listening to too much of that twat Jeremy Clarkson.
I don't "follow" Jeremy and I do not watch his programs but it does sound like we have the same mind set when it comes to twitter.
The fact that 90% of the feeds you were getting were pure drivel would suggest the people you follow are just not interesting and had nothing worthwhile to say and were possibly not using the platform to it's optimum potential - lets not tarnish the social worlds population with the same brush as the published poo taking times of those people you follow(ed).
I totally agree. My experience was one of boredom as i followed some of the top domainers and affiliaters. The majority of what was posted was drivvel. So you are correct I haven't found anyone interesting enough to follow. Post your twitter name and i will see if I eat my words as you convert me.
Here's a social experiment for you....
I bet you without looking if you follow the 20 odd twitter accounts on this thread, at least 80% of their collective last 12 posts each will be along the lines of....
"sounds like a good idea"
"I already read that on the bbc site"
"there's no way i'm going down that road"
"see you Friday"
"car in garage
"
blah blah
In other words, the majority of tweets having zero relevant info.
(no offence to the twitter account posters in this thread)
I have no doubt it can be a good thing and a great marketing tool if you get the followers but I think the majority of the big sites have the same mentality. They've got it so we better get it.
So when you pop over to their sites you get "follow us on facebook", "tweet us on twitter", "sign up to our html newsletter" . So I ask, how many times do you want to receive the same info?
Now, I know it is a necessity for them to have them all, as some may want a "tweet" instead of a "facebooker" or whatever to get the info. I feel sorry for the IT guys, they're having to triplicate the message everytime.
But in reality, it is all the same potential customer base that is getting diluted everytime a new "must have" social site pops up. Where will it end? I'll tell you. In a few years time your main page could look like an iphone with 40 little icons neatly standing to attention and taking up half your main page before you even get to put any info on it.
follow us, tweet us, flikr us, pop us, ping us, sling us, ming us and whatever.
I've no doubt about its potential and I know it's my loss but I can live with that. Same with facebook and the rest.
I also know it is good for breaking news but so is reuters and google. I don't need to be one of the first to know. In fact, google will most likely have indexed this within the hour. That's fast enough for me.
.